cleric Nemir

Here's the thing. Whether it is a single body or a government type,societies tend to have some form of leadership at it's core. So when the sh*t hits the fan,it will be in close connection to that core,be it ruler or rulers,and varieties of the sh*t can come down to: a) it originated from that core b) it is aimed towards it by an outside/inside party or event ,and c) is still in progress (the 'game of thrones' version). So when a player and his party,as they advance trough game and gain power,become well known troughout the land,they also become well known and observed-with-intention by every powerful body in said land. What it means is that when the sh*t hits,you're gonna be there. And there you go,you're flipping a coin. In a) and b) situations,you can only start the real flippin' when the situation reaches climax,all the small flips up until that moment seem irrelevant. But it has a story,and that story can be nevertheless brilliant. Still,in ending provided by a) or b),you know the real choice will come just there,at the very end. Your character is not required to be of any particular race, cultural background, sex, class, moral outlook, personality, organization, etc. The premise is that you are a victim of circumstance. How you choose to deal with your situation is up to you. You can bear it with stoicism and restraint or fly off in a rage at anyone who gets in your way. The world will react to your choices, but the game is designed to give you the freedom to play your character the way you want to See,this also cannot be a description of PS:T character,only partially. That game offered us a unique ideas at a cost of being even more linear. Not a bad tradeoff for some cool endings,but PE is not gonna be like PS:T , T:ToN is,and it is suited for that kind of concept. That's what's bothering me in fantasy cRPGs like Baldur's,Icewinds,etc. Do we have to have a sh*tstorm at some point? I said I cannot properly imagine an equally good ending for classic fantasy cRPG,but I noticed something else. Situation c). I cannot think of a game that explored this potential. Lionheart had it going but blew it. That is what really begs my focus here,because I feel that we can flip alot coins in there. For example,let's say there are 6 factions in the game world. They may not necessarily be factions or 6 in number,but let's build on that. Six factions that vary in power level and personal goals and roles in the existing world. Slowly,you and your party arise to become a sort of an 7th faction,and (this is to be a deep-ingame moment,let's imagine you completed a great deed) the path to those 6 most influential factions is opened. You are now in a position to gain knowledge of their affairs,and able to react to each and every affair the way you find pleasing to your persona. Stronghold fits inhere perfectly. You are based,they are based-let the games begin. You have a whole 6 unique "badass" characters and their stronghold-like bases and manpower to deal with as you damn please. Side AND main quests for each faction-pacts,contract jobs,experiments,rituals,disputes and wars among them that affect the whole land.. Possible outcomes - numerous,because there's gonna be heavy choices all over,and they all change the setting into something different. And the story? Think of it as a puzzle-set of smaller stories that you combine into a meaningful outcome,completely based on action/reaction (example: you helped rise the faction of Glanfathan Ciphers,and lend your stronghold's forces+sidequest aditions when they battled for the free palatinate of Dyrwood(and won,yay),amassing an army that marches to destroy Aedyr empire,as you successfully helped your fellow Ciphers sign a war pact with Vailians(I hope I did this part correctly ). Feel free to insert "dragons" somewhere,ehueheheh Key scene: breached to the capitol and the castle,they come out to: surrender,be banished or die. ////// The sh*tstormless version is that you manage to unite all land in peaceful&loving community,going about from faction to faction and finding solutions to problems,etc. Would love to see it most cause it would no doubt be the hardest way to complete the game Key scene: arranging a peace treaty between the fractions leaders done a la NWN2 trial (and in the end left with "I sure owned that fukers" feeling )). At the end,when one of the possible key moments is presented and dealt with,there goes your ending-scene with a recap of what went and what stayed,and a glimpse of what future holds,the future you made by choices you selected trough gameplay. You may end as a tyrant ruler of all,or goody two shoes member of the United whatever council,yet earl or no more than a knight,under whichever faction you supported.You may destroy all and erect zombieland,or give it all up and go raise a tribe somewhere. Or set sail and become a pirate,yolo. And that's it,no king of shadows or nothing. Sure,bestial/demonic/undead sort of bosses and epic battles,but not a final one. The point is that,when I think about it,I would better enjoy that puzzle-set of smaller stories within the world of PE rather than a major plot story that is predetermined. As I would love a SET of different "badass" characters (and be able to decide if friend/enemy) more than one ultimate badassery.

Your post,first on this page,proposes a task-like climactic battle,but it isn't all that different than "fighting ultimate evils". Messier's post below shows some fine examples.. that aren't all that different except for that "kill everyone",when you think of it. It's still You vs. big bad enemy/group. All the choices that are really relevant are left for that moment,which kinda nulls the whole process of getting there,IMO.

So the Scarborough fair became a Vanity one. I'm learning more and more about that funny word,ambiguous. Never going to use it,though.

How exactly do you people figure our comments are being dev's white-knighting? I mean,look at this: No one here is saying that the game is going to suck or that we aren't going to play it, what we are saying is that some of the things being done are not exactly to our liking. But saying that, I think that everyone here is hoping to be proven wrong. What this is all coming down to is some people white knighting for the developers and defending every single thing they say and do. Well I think that the developers are big boys and can take criticism, in fact I think they welcome it (or they should) as it provides more information/feedback then someone just coming in to say "OMG, OMG you guys are great, so exited for the game, can't wait". This is a forum, people come here to discus things about the game that are know so far, so please leave the moderating to the moderators. That post is on fire. Flames all over. I just posted my humble opinion,ffs. A polite one,even. Discuss all you want man,but you're doing it wrong. *shrug*... What I see is a lot of "possibly"s arbitrarily replaced with "probably"s. It's not that people are saying it's DEFINITELY going to suck... it's that they're saying it's PROBABLY going to suck, for reasons unknown. Example: No kill XP. Suddenly, the simple fact that they're awarding XP in a different fashion generates an uproar about combat never giving you XP. Even though, no one ever said that killing will explicitly NOT ever grant you XP. Just that the act of slaying won't inherently be an XP-worthy thing, with a simple adjustment to the amount of XP for whatever it was you killed. And, instead of saying "Okay, I just wish we still got XP for each kill, that's all. It's a preference thing, and therefore I am unhappy," oodles of folk still have their torches and pitchforks out and will adamantly defend their ire at the "fact" that they won't be receiving XP for any kills anymore. People would rather find a reason to hang on to the torches and pitchforks than put them down and admit over-reaction. Then, of course, the even easier thing to do at that point is simply to pretend anyone pointing out reasons why they're overreacting just likes the change and doesn't like the way THEY (the overreacters) want it to be. That's what's bothersome. Not disagreement, or displeasure. But irrationality. Pointing out potential problems before the game is out is one thing. Bashing the game for "definite" problems that we don't even know exist is another, entirely. This. If this is my fellow white-knight,then by god I am entering that knighthood faster than you can scream "fire!".

I admire the depth of possibilities that you present. If the game itself would end up so deep that my question can be answered for me within it,rather than in a wiki description,I would first proclaim it the ultimate role playing game I have ever.

Dunno if I really like the whole super-villain thing,or the "good" ole "great evil at end-what will you do?" type of story. Heck,I would be amazed if it was anything other than that,like positively amazed,if it was done good. I cannot properly imagine an ending that would knock me off and that it doesn't involve "ultimate end evil",and that's what bothers me often. If there's anything I would really like,it is to see an ending idea never seen before in fantasy crpgs; as for villains-I would love them ingame and all,but not in a role critical to the plot. I wouldn't like it less if it was done with same old "great evil at end-what will you do?",but still..

Then this forum is pointless. (until that game comes out) Never said that. Never meant to say it,either. A little more time and a few updates with videos on gameplay&mechanics isn't exactly a game release,I only think that what we've seen now is too little to start judging much,and we should wait some more. It's just that I feel it is too early to summarize with all the bits still discussed in various other threads,and that is exactly what happened here. Most of the posters have still a vague sense of what the topic they see as bad/good will actually look like and behave ingame. We all do,perhaps. It may be just my opinion,but I didn't base it on wild assumptions. I saw it in the 7+ pages here.

That is a 2 way street. Maybe. I still think it's too early for all this.

Heck,I would love to see something like the Guns of Avalon concept of guns in a fantasy world. Very hard to obtain and every piece of ammo a small treasure,but efficient. Or something like that anyway.

I would certainly welcome the situations where if I meet a,say,group of 2 archers and 4 meele/tank type enemies ,they have a +X something on them generated randomly,may it be a sword,bow/crossbow/gun or a piece of armor,ammo and such. Nothing wrong with that. If they themselves are spawned randomly and I get a 1 caster,2 assasins,3 meele/tank on a replay of the same spot,it can only be better and more immersive,unless the setting and the spawns are mismatched (but then again,I trust the devs enough to "know" that would not happen) . If I may,I would draw a parallel to the Creatures may respawn in certain areas if you rest, but this won't be always the case.. Wouldn't it be extremely stupid immersion-breaking if the mentioned respawns were same or out-of-place? What I intend to say is that I believe the game must already have some randomness with spawns and loot intended,and I highly doubt that this is done in a bad way. I fail to see why can't it or shouldn't be made random in every encounter (naturally,other than plot-relevant,unique,quested mini-boss etc. types),without exaggerating.

Well now,I imagine this thread was harmless in intent,but the resulting posts show that it is simply too early for that. I mean,we haven't yet seen none of the gameplay like Wasteland 2 demo provides... It may look like it to some,but there's not that much ground to go on,yet. We need to see what it looks like to play it as is before even attempting to judge the game any further.

As someone generally opposed to the idea of multi-classing I was almost ready to click all the "no"s here,but then I saw second part of the poll ( "If multi-classing was available..") and it got me thinking. There would be some interesting moments if the game provided me with situations such as in the option 4. I wouldn't mind if in some point I get the chance to become a member of some secret order of Ciphers or such,where multi-classing to a Cipher would become available ; and looking at option 6 it makes me think that,instead of prestige classes,it would be fun to see a merge of two (or more??) classes that give birth to a similar thing like a prestige class concept,only more fluid and natural,so to say. Regardless of the fact whether we would play along with it or like it even,I think that kind of concept can have a place in the game. My final voting summary is this: yes,multi-classing should be available,but they would do well to make it an interesting process with an interesting results.

Regarding the topic,I dare say that although the "project eternity" has grown to most of us as a name,I think it wouldn't be much of a deal to let it become something else,even plain Eternity,since it is now still a.. well,project.

!!!!! oh wow,to see this band in here was.. priceless.

Kind words,thanks you two. Had a rough couple of months,pulled trough. Anyway,consider yourselves blessed,fully healed and protected from evil I'm off to catch up on the threads that I missed. Feels like I'm about to read a book. Also,I would like to say that ,regarding priests in PE, I would still personally love that a priest description tells more of "a medium between a deity and the world" sort of thing,and how he/she heavily depends on that connection. The "Such men and women have found a divine link to their chosen deity, but their abilities stem solely from within." part sounds a bit wrong to me. I mean,of course the power comes from the priest when it comes to execution,but was the level of that power in his "soul" already there? To be more precise - does worshiping a deity allow priest's "soul" to be empowered by the deity,or the whole worship thing is just a mean of focus for the priest to unlock the hidden power within? My idea of priest sounds like worshiping a deity actually gives bonus to your soul's power,in such a world. Otherwise I would find logical that deities have no actual effect on said world,and priests are no more than a fanatical group of extraordinary people that just use the deities names and mottoes to go about.

Long time no see. Took me some time to resurface this thread,but I needed to do it because I was wrong. I apologize to you,Lephys,for "attacking" you publicly out of my clouded judgement,misinterpretation that was caused due to both my personal problems that pressured me at the time and my level of comprehension of english. As of now,I will do my best to make sure this does not happen between me and another forum member,ever again. I am deeply sorry.

This was something I was wondering as well, as it seems a bit confusing. My best guess at this point? Maybe they meant that, if a 6-year-old boy with a young, underdeveloped soul (as far as soul powers go... maybe he hasn't hit soul-puberty yet? *shrug*) worships the god of Awesome, he doesn't just get a big powerline from his god to himself that supplies him with 7,000,000 volts of Awesome. I think he gets the ability to channel his own soul's power into forms of Awesome, but his own soul is the power source, rather than the deity. It's kind of like someone giving you a key to the library. You're still either literate or you're not, and which books you read and what knowledge you gain have nothing to do with the person who gave you the key. Again, "stem solely from within" is confusing, as it seems to imply "the deity isn't really important here." *shrug* I may be mistaken, but isn't that essentially how Paladins function in P:E? If so, this would be problematic, in that Priests would quite literally just be Paladins who happen to be religious. Ok,Lephys.Had to say something. What is your point,exactly,besides to mock me? Is it that I am supposed to view you as some superior person that has all right to tell me how my view of a cleric should be? I came to understand that we are here allowed to debate our views and ideas against the existing ones,so please explain what gives you the right to insult me and my thoughts openly? There's a thread that debates the Obsidian's view of paladin. Every topic has a thread similar to this. So tell me,am I to just abandon all my ideas simply because Obsidian already said their word on this (or any) matter? Or - and this is a good one -because you hate/dislike me or whatever? By not simply provoking me - but insulting me,alone me,and everyone should by your logic stay calm and continue with posting their ideas and views,including the moderator,and the king of all - you. I don't mind being simply provoked by you or anyone,but there's a line in all. Care to explain yourself?

That would depend on what sort of action is required to be acknowledged/punished by a specific deity. Easily replace an entire lifetime? As I imagine a priest,his whole life's purpose is to serve a deity and not falter in his worship,but to be punished so severe that you loose your all would require a direct act against that deity/one of his major principles. I would welcome to see even that situation opted. Like being a young priest serving god of light and sun to get tempted by a chance of obtaining greater power as lich king or something,and get viciously punished by his god for saying "yes" to that. And yes - I would rather have a continuation to this than "game over". Anyway,I do think that in wronging his deity the priest should suffer penalties.

MMO approach? So if the game is RTwP,I imagine it will pause the cooldown as well.

I guess it could be argued that different kinds of belief, faith, and philosophy grant different kinds of magic. At least, that's the only way I could see it being explained. Taken from the wiki once again: "there are ranks of dedicated adventuring or mercenary priests who have turned the flame of their faith into a spark to ignite the power of their souls", perhaps different faiths grant different "flames"? ^All this reminds me of Dragon Ball (anime). Faith being seen as something not directly connected to deities is ok if it's viewed from the perspective of our real world,where I have faith that I will succeed in the tasks my job sets before me and strength of that faith pushes me towards completion. But we must be clear on what a faith in deity exactly grants us ingame. A potential to execute power beyond our character's own soul or a guiding force to unlock the potential that characters already had.

The matter of caution is left for us to mimic entirely rather than it is being scripted as something characters do automatically. Listen,sense motive,search - even wilderness lore/survival need to be imagined more automatic in execution and connected to one another in a more natural way,plus the imperative on cautious approach. If someone with wilderness lore determines that there are dangerous creatures about,and party is keeping a formation or limited in movement speed (avoiding party scattering is for the sake of caution more than else), then it is logical that when someone from the party hears something behind the closed door they should not start running around or opening doors just because auto attack is on. Without auto attack it is closer to a puppet mode,so we need a finer balance if the automatics are imagined to help us ingame. This is the crucial flaw in the system, and that is why I believe it needs to be reworked. It's not a matter of powerplay versus caution,it's only logical. Maybe a simple all-party commands like stand ground/attack on sight/etc. will help alone,I don't know,but something needs to be done.

EXACTLY. That's what I was trying to say here. That "stem solely from within" sounds same as monk to me. That's what I was trying to point when saying the idea of priest is misunderstood. The very line doesn't make sense. Either priest is granted divine power from the connection to the deity or monks are able to cast divine. If one's soul has all that power locked as a potential why haven't the monks discovered it? The priest concept needs to be very and strictly clear on this matter,as I said all along. edit: I know you imagined this meal rich with extra irony rather than iron,moderator,but.. actually,thank you.

Heh. What can I as a cleric add here,lemme see.. oh,the little matter called undead. I can kill a dozen skeletons with one move,mostly. Is that a too much advantage when another class is facing a dozen skeletons? No,it just means that cleric is op against them. So how can you balance this? It's like Lephys said - it's a puzzle. Wee need all the pieces,that's why we form a party. Lemme quote the man,this is brilliant :

Hi,I'm Heol Telwen and I am a druid. Welcome to my pimped out grove. Here we have a solid rock structure,fashioned in the shape of the Severed Hand,surrounded with a forest of treants,and every creature dwelling within is made to swallow a seed so that treants will remain friendly towards it. Bonus is the moat filled with anacondas. Wolves,bears and panthers dwell in the woods,sure. Charmed and friendly. But let's meet my companions. Here's Zodiac,a ranger and a friend. She leads a hunting party that provide us with steady income of food,and scouts the surrounding lands with the help of another.. friend. A shady rogue by the name of Marduk. Has a keen eye,but a bad habit of robbing the locals homes. Gladly kills anyone we consider a threat,bless him,has real talent in doing it quickly and silently. Galder,the barbarian from up north,Sagot the fighter,blacksmit's son. They train and lead our defensive force - the "force" may be squishy elves but they are improving much under their guidance. Sagot set up a blacksmith to keep providing men with decent equipment. Galder? Spends nights as innkeeper,continuing to call our elven wine "a women's drink". Marduk helped him smuggle some brews from way up north. Mead is good,we decided to adopt the recipe and make our own. But meet our sorceress,Sylph. Her origin is a mystery even to me. She found some ancient ruin nearby to study,she claims she senses powerful magic still present there. The fresh air,beauty and peace of my grove,healthy food.. made her admit the positive side of being out of her precious town,finally. I was beginning to worry that she might leave,couldn't tempt her easily like Galder and Marduk (hot spring bath with river dryads out back,what can I say..). Nemir,a cleric friend of mine,has been here again yesterday for that sole reason. He's rather busy with his church of Bane and all,but the beauty of this place leaves noone's heart for too long..at least that's his excuse line for coming back to the dryads. I enjoy our long talks over nature and gods,their importance,their differences.. He likes it here,but he tells me often that his church's yard is a safest place there is. Plus it's in the middle of town,anyone attacking him there would be attacking town,so he's covered by passing the safety worries onto the king. He's in the royal council,you know. Not that it all interests me,it just sounds good.